|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Running Wild /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1360377565 Message started by justin_o_guy2 on 02/08/13 at 18:39:25 |
|
Title: Running Wild Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/08/13 at 18:39:25 Shootin & killing,, Former COP..He LOves Obama & supports gun control. No Wonder his craziness isnt being talked about 24/7. No wonder his political positions arent all over the place. If he was a right wing white male, things Juuuust mite be different, ehh? http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/copkiller-leaves-manifesto-praising-obama-and-calling-for-gun-control/ |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Paraquat on 02/08/13 at 22:25:23 http://www.kesq.com/image/view/-/18466284/medRes/1/-/maxh/360/maxw/640/-/rsguncz/-/los-angeles-mistaken-truck-dorner-jpg.jpg Investigators say 47-year-old Maggie Carranza and her 71-year-old mother Emma Hernandez were in a Toyota Tundra pickup truck similar to Christopher Dorner's vehicle. TORRANCE, Calif. - A lawyer says two women delivering newspapers had no warning before they were mistakenly shot by Los Angeles police officers searching for triple murder suspect Christopher Dorner. Investigators say 47-year-old Maggie Carranza and her 71-year-old mother Emma Hernandez were in a Toyota Tundra pickup truck similar to Dorner's vehicle. They were delivering newspapers in Torrance when LAPD officers guarding a target named in Dorner's manifesto peppered the pickup with bullets, wounding the women, before dawn on Thursday. Police Chief Charlie Beck says the pickup's headlights weren't on and it was a case of mistaken identity. The women's attorney, Glen Jonas, tells KCBS-TV there were no warnings and no orders. Just gunshots. Carranza had minor hand injuries. Hernandez is hospitalized with a gunshot wound in the back. Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. http://www.kesq.com/kesq/Manhunt-Lawyer-says-LA-police-shot-women-without-warning/-/232254/18466240/-/bs5g9gz/-/index.html Definitely not out of control or anything. --Steve |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Paraquat on 02/08/13 at 22:29:14 Two women who were shot by Los Angeles police in Torrance early Thursday during a massive manhunt for an ex-LAPD officer were delivering newspapers, sources said. The women, shot in the 19500 block of Redbeam Avenue, were taken to area hospitals, Torrance police Lt. Devin Chase said. They were not identified. One was shot in the hand and the other in the back, according to Jesse Escochea, who captured video of the victims being treated. It was not immediately known what newspapers the women were delivering. After the shooting, the blue pickup was riddled with bullet holes and what appeared to be newspapers lay in the street alongside. PHOTOS: Manhunt for ex-LAPD officer Local, state and federal authorities are involved in a massive search for Christoper Jordan Dorner, 33, a former Los Angeles Police Department officer who is believed to have threatened "unconventional and asymmetrical warfare" against police in an online manifesto, and was suspected of shooting three police officers, one of whom died, early Thursday in Riverside County. Dorner also is suspected of killing a couple in Orange County earlier this week. Sources said the Los Angeles police detectives involved in the Torrance shooting were on protective detail for a police official named in the suspect's supposed manifesto, which was posted on what authorities believe is his Facebook page. TIMELINE: Manhunt for ex-LAPD officer A second shooting, involving Torrance police officers, occurred about 5:45 a.m. at Flagler Lane and Beryl Street in Torrance. No injuries were reported in that incident. Chase said that in both instances police came across vehicles they thought were similar to the one Dorner is believed to be driving. Neither vehicle was Dorner's. "Now it appears neither of them are directly related," Chase said. "In both of them, officers believed they were at the time." INTERACTIVE MAP: Searching for suspected shooter Freeway signs urged motorists to call 911 if they saw the suspect's 2005 Nissan Titan as officers patrolled the streets near one of the Riverside County crime scenes with rifles at the ready. Los Angeles police were put on a citywide tactical alert and the California Highway Patrol issued a "blue alert" for nine Southern California counties, warning that Dorner was considered "armed and extremely dangerous." Hours after authorities announced they were looking for Dorner in connection with the double homicide this week in Irvine, the search intensified after three police officers were shot in Riverside County Thursday and Dorner was identified as a possible suspect. The first police shooting occurred about 1:30 a.m. Thursday in Corona, where two LAPD officers were providing protection for someone mentioned in Dorner's manifesto, officials said. One officer suffered a graze wound to the head during a shootout and Dorner fled the scene, police said. FULL COVERAGE: Sweeping manhunt for rampaging ex-cop A short time later, two Riverside officers were shot at the corner of Magnolia Avenue and Arlington Avenue in Riverside. Riverside police Lt. Guy Toussaint said the officers were sitting at a red light when they were ambushed. One was killed, the other was still in surgery Thursday morning. None of the officers involved were identified. “Our officers were stopped at an intersection at a red light when they were ambushed," he said. "Because of the close proximity to the timeline, we believe there is a strong likelihood that former LAPD Officer Christopher Dorner was involved in our incident.” DOCUMENT: Read the manifesto In the online manifesto, Dorner specifically named the father of Monica Quan, the Cal State Fullerton assistant basketball coach who was found dead Sunday in Irvine along with her fiance, Keith Lawrence. Randy Quan, a retired LAPD captain, was involved in the review process that ultimately led to Dorner’s dismissal. A former U.S. Navy reservist, Dorner was fired in 2009 for allegedly making false statements about his training officer. In the manifesto, he complained that Randy Quan and others did not fairly represent him at the review hearing. “The violence of action will be high .... I will bring unconventional and asymmetrical warfare to those in LAPD uniform whether on or off duty," Dorner wrote. Authorities said they believe Dorner attempted to steal a boat from an elderly man about 10:30 p.m. Wednesday at the Point Loma Yacht Club in San Diego, hours before the shootings in Riverside County. The boat owner reported being accosted by a burly man who tied him up, threatened him with a gun and said he wanted the boat to flee to Mexico. PHOTOS: Manhunt for ex-LAPD officer But while they were trying to get underway, a rope became entangled in the propeller and the boat was inoperable, authorities said. The suspect fled the scene and the boat owner was unharmed. About 2 a.m., a citizen reported finding property belonging to Dorner on a street near Lindbergh Field, not far from the scene of the attempted boat theft. The property included a briefcase and Dorner's LAPD badge. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2013/02/ex-cop-manhunt-newspaper-delivery-women-shot.html --Steve |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Paladin. on 02/09/13 at 03:13:09 Subject is "Running Wild." Dorner is not shooting "running wild." He was discharged from the LAPD and the military for complaining about LAPD running wild. Such as the two women delivering newspapers. The LAPD is running wild, shooting innocent people without warning. Which, by the way, is totally normal. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by LANCER on 02/10/13 at 04:31:56 70414C4144494E200 wrote:
He is the suspect responsible for killing the daughter of the person who defended him in the proceedings which resulted in his dismissal from the force. In my mind, that fits "running wild". |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Paladin. on 02/10/13 at 09:01:04 No. Killing a specific person is not being "wild." Wild is the LAPD, with no warning, starting to shoot 60 bullets at unarmed innocent women. You are a hunter. Do you shoot at a known target, taking one shot to kill the animal? Or do you go out in the field, see something move, pray and spray bullets until you run out of ammo, and then see if you managed to kill? |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by houstonbofh on 02/10/13 at 09:07:51 32030E03060B0C620 wrote:
This... Guilty or not (and remember he is a suspect, not a convicted criminal at this point) the women were victims of violence by the police. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Paraquat on 02/11/13 at 06:16:02 SLIPPERY SLOPE!!!!!!!!! http://m.now.msn.com/christopher-dorner-is-first-drone-target-on-us-soil This should tie into the drone thread... --Steve |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/11/13 at 16:35:29 If ya dont like the thread title, okay,, I get your point. If you wanna split hairs that a former cop killing people isnt running wild, then you see it your way. I still say anyone who WAS a cop who is NOW running around killing people he has a grudge against is Running Wild,, |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by srinath on 02/11/13 at 20:02:51 You see we are not going to ever get "criminals by doing background checks" ... we can prevent good people from going berserk and killing 100's in shooting sprees with a $100 bullet. Of course we are going to get criminals in background checks, but they will get guns on the street ... bullets, they wont if a bullet is a $100 and you have to provide a valid gun licence to get it. There is the usual blaming others for your problems rampant in the gun nut community ... I guess as soon as the full on mental health programs are funded we can work on getting the criminally insane committed, till then we are going to be content with having them limited. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by LANCER on 02/12/13 at 04:11:01 6D5C515C5954533D0 wrote:
So, when LAPD shoots an unarmed person it is "wild" but when a civilian (ex-LAPD in this case) shoots an unarmed person it is NOT "wild" ? REALLY ??? Both were purposeful, both were with the intent to kill, and both were wrong. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Paraquat on 02/12/13 at 06:15:19 The LAPD shot a white dude they thought was Dorner. --Steve |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/12/13 at 06:53:04 A agree,, LAPD has gone Off the Hook on this, total Wide Open Stewpid, HOw many have they killed now, Thinking they were Gettin Dorner? 2 women, a man, others? |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Paladin. on 02/12/13 at 08:37:13 38353A3731266663540 wrote:
So, when LAPD shoots an unarmed person it is "wild" but when a civilian (ex-LAPD in this case) shoots an unarmed person it is NOT "wild" ? REALLY ??? Both were purposeful, both were with the intent to kill, and both were wrong. [/quote] A SPECIFIC Target is not being "wild". Again: You are a hunter. Do you shoot at a known target, taking one shot to kill the animal? Or do you go out in the field, see something move, pray and spray bullets until you run out of ammo, and then see if you managed to kill? |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Paraquat on 02/12/13 at 09:11:51 392620273A3D0C3C0C34262A61530 wrote:
As far as I know all the victims of the LAPD have survived their injuries. --Steve |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/13/13 at 09:40:16 What a Comfort! Still absolutely inexcusable behavior on their part. Idiots, shooting people up, not even in the same type/color vehicle,, Idiots! |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Paraquat on 02/13/13 at 11:11:05 I am sure it is a photoshopped picture but it appeared to be a CNN still with a caption that read "Suspect forced back inside burning building". Regardless it appears this has reached it's climax. edit: http://https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/223569_10151403395358190_742342811_n.jpg --Steve |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Midnightrider on 02/13/13 at 11:18:55 I hope that is the end of it. The cops have made complete idiots of themselves. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by srinath on 02/13/13 at 15:21:19 6E7177706D6A5B6B5B63717D36040 wrote:
And to think these are the best selected and trained and the most suitable (other than CIA and special ops guys) to carry guns ... What's wrong with this picture ? Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/13/13 at 15:54:47 That you believe that they are as you described is whats wrong,, YOu have no idea how the psychological makeup of someone who WANTS to be a cop compares to the majority who dont,, I would submit that the majority, those who dont Want power to exercise over others, are more suitable to be armed than many many cops., |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by bill67 on 02/13/13 at 16:00:15 JOG you really have a hard time understanding what people post. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/13/13 at 16:05:57 & why dont you explain it to me then? Im pretty sure I got his point. Im also pretty sure he BELIEVES the cops are the ones who should have the guns. THEYRE the ones who can handle them. THEYRE the ones who can be trusted. But he has NO idea the psychological strengths & abilities of Those Who do NOT choose to have power over others, as do the cops.,. Bill, youre not wrong again. Youre wrong STILL. In order to be wrong Again you would have had to have spent a moment NOT being wrong. Youre perpetually confused. But never in doubt, |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Paladin. on 02/13/13 at 16:38:17 5061726171756174000 wrote:
But you are right, the two women delivering newspapers survived, one hit in an hand, the other shot in the back. The LAPD missed 58 times. What is worse? That they shot 60 bullets at them -- or they couldn't kill them? |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Paladin. on 02/13/13 at 16:42:29 445B5D5A4740714171495B571C2E0 wrote:
It is a Catch-22. You do not what those who are cops, but they ones you do want are not willing to be cops. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by srinath on 02/13/13 at 16:45:43 4C4D56515E4B573F0 wrote:
And to think these are the best selected and trained and the most suitable (other than CIA and special ops guys) to carry guns ... What's wrong with this picture ? Cool. Srinath.[/quote] OK Let me rephrase ... these are the best - should have been "these should and they claim to be the best" OK - happy ? Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Midnightrider on 02/13/13 at 20:38:12 No one in their right mind would want to be in Law Enforcement in a large metropolis like LA. You're out manned and outgunned. No matter what you do its futile. You kill or jail one gang punk and there's five more ready to take his place. I hate to say it because we'll be acused of being a police state but the military or National Gaurd needs to clean those places up and make it safe for decent people to walk the streets again. Gangs are terrorist and should be treated as such. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Paraquat on 02/14/13 at 06:09:21 Wasn't there a study or a psych profile done that showed the minds of criminals were almost identical to those in law enforcement? Or is/was that just hearsay? --Steve |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Serowbot on 02/14/13 at 08:25:34 091610170A0D3C0C3C04161A51630 wrote:
I understand the point you're making,... but,.. by this logic, we should only hire people that don't like guns and don't want to be police,... as police... We should hire Srinath,... and Bill... ;D... |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by srinath on 02/14/13 at 08:29:34 43676A606769667A7C676A6B7C0E0 wrote:
Yes and we will be screamed @ by the right for the "biggest government program ever". Seriously, a $100 bullet tax will work wonders. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Paladin. on 02/14/13 at 08:59:21 3C3D26212E3B274F0 wrote:
Prohibition worked, didn't it. Oh.... wait.... it didn't work. Instead in created "big crime." People actually drank more. About a decade ago Canada doubled the tax on cigarettes. Instead of doubling tax revenues the money went down. Previously honest people went over the border to buy cheaper US cigarettes -- selling to friends. If you want the gangs to get bigger, try taking guns and ammo away from previously honest people. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/14/13 at 10:06:49 05343934313C3B550 wrote:
Prohibition worked, didn't it. Oh.... wait.... it didn't work. Instead in created "big crime." People actually drank more. About a decade ago Canada doubled the tax on cigarettes. Instead of doubling tax revenues the money went down. Previously honest people went over the border to buy cheaper US cigarettes -- selling to friends. If you want the gangs to get bigger, try taking guns and ammo away from previously honest people. [/quote] Yep.. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by srinath on 02/14/13 at 19:36:00 1D2C212C2924234D0 wrote:
Prohibition worked, didn't it. Oh.... wait.... it didn't work. Instead in created "big crime." People actually drank more. About a decade ago Canada doubled the tax on cigarettes. Instead of doubling tax revenues the money went down. Previously honest people went over the border to buy cheaper US cigarettes -- selling to friends. If you want the gangs to get bigger, try taking guns and ammo away from previously honest people. [/quote] True prohibition wont work, I can make alcohol in my garage. Even so during prohibition, the gangs were getting alcohol from canada. We need to get canada and mexico to go along with our bullet tax. Now mexico will say OK and do the same thing they always do ... send it over in tunnels ... but see bullets weigh more than cocaine ... so we will just be trading one problem for a bit smaller problem ... Canada has to cooperate, else we will be flooded wiht canadian bullets. It also has to be nationwide, else people will just go over to the next state. Its a bit crude, but since there is no real data acquisition ... or there was but access to that data has been blocked ... so we have to work around it. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by houstonbofh on 02/14/13 at 23:14:19 2E2F34333C29355D0 wrote:
And I can make guns and bullets in my garage. Not very nice ones, but have you ever tasted bathtub whiskey? |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by srinath on 02/15/13 at 07:39:00 2F2832343328292528212F470 wrote:
And I can make guns and bullets in my garage. Not very nice ones, but have you ever tasted bathtub whiskey?[/quote] Not very nice bullets will prevent you form loading em in a high capacity clip and firing off a few 100 ... you'd go through a couple before the gun jams ... alcohol can be made darn well. Some of the best moonshine I've ever had came from someone's garage. Ans with anything it takes time, talent, skill and equipment. You can make better bullets than S&W make ... but you'd need to be a machinist and slave over them a few hours for a handful. Of course you could have a huge factory and churn em out ... but then, you'd be a bullet factory, not a lone wolf, and would get noticed and caught. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Paraquat on 02/15/13 at 11:09:05 Not true. I know a guy whom I ended up following on photobucket some how. In less than two months time he acquired ingots and learned how to mix, melt, pour, and cast his own bullets. Reloading isn't that hard. I'd say it's on par with farming in a garden at home versus a commercial farm. You get out what you put in. It's just as good if not better it just takes a little time and extra attention. --Steve |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by houstonbofh on 02/15/13 at 20:13:55 65647F7877627E160 wrote:
A man who has never made bullets or gunpowder is arguing with me about how hard it is to make bullets and gunpowder. This is the problem with the entire debate. People who know nothing about guns are trying to regulate them. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/15/13 at 21:37:35 slap, slap, slap,, |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by thumperclone on 02/15/13 at 23:26:25 57504A4C4B50515D5059573F0 wrote:
A man who has never made bullets or gunpowder is arguing with me about how hard it is to make bullets and gunpowder. This is the problem with the entire debate. People who know nothing about guns are trying to regulate them.[/quote] as a kid the neighbors chem set helped us terrioze the local ant hils with hm gun powder.. our biggest boom was 2" of gas in a coffee can w/ a co2 cartridge in it helped dad reload shot gun shells he wouldnt let me touch the various rifle rounds (i got to polish the brass)but i watched and learned we never made "bullets" always bought those, none were balls made our own surf casting weights.. heard today limits on ammo passed the first round(no pun)of congress anarchy is not far in the future |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/16/13 at 07:05:25 47405A5C5B40414D4049472F0 wrote:
A man who has never made bullets or gunpowder is arguing with me about how hard it is to make bullets and gunpowder. This is the problem with the entire debate. People who know nothing about guns are trying to regulate them.[/quote] Somehow, in spite of all the scientific data available to be looked at. In spite of "MOre guns = More Crime" being demonstrably false, there are people who want to disarm the people,, Now, you can Hope thats just out of ignorance, &, In large part, I would agree that it is, BUT There IS a criminal elite who NEED the people disarmed, because when the economy does ( eventually) what this economy MUST do, they dont want an armed population seeing to it that they get what theyve got coming, An armed population can Force investigations & subpoenas & trials & Long, LONG jail sentences. So, theyre pushing & offering $$$ & any sup[port they can offer to the ignorant fools who have NO idea what theyre really doing as they race to become victims, |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by bill67 on 02/16/13 at 08:38:58 When was the last time our armed population forced and investigation. ::) |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/16/13 at 10:13:24 Get DIS armed & see how things go,, Id suggest you look at hoistory, but we all know youre not much for exposing that steel trap mind of yours to data that could affect its thinking. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by srinath on 02/18/13 at 17:17:24 OK you are all assuming you can buy all the rest f the chemicals in large quantities ... Further a bullet made and poured in your garage will in short order jam the gun after a few uses ... yea you can make them all very good ... it will take you hours and hours ... how long does it take you to say ... fit a piston to a bore in your garage ... bore/hone etc etc included ... 2-3 hours for 1-2 people ... suzuki does that in a few mins ... of course they do, they have a robot that costs 30 million. More guns = more crime, or less crime ... we dont know ... the NRA has blocked that research. In the absense of research and data for research we are likely using a sledge hammer to remove a rotten tooth. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by srinath on 02/18/13 at 18:18:11 33383D3D6766510 wrote:
Our armed population is the most toothless there is. The bankers robbed them of their retirement with a pen (or some funny software). The oil baron president and vice president robbed them blind @ the gas station with a gas pump. The middle men in the insurance robbed them of their health with a syringe and get this ... drum roll please ... I haven't forgotten you JOG ... Monsatan robbed them off their health with a spoon. Our well armed citizenry does little more than kill off beer cans and collect dole ... follow the pattern ... welfare queens are the biggest gun owners. They're rugged individualists who are armed and will take care of their own as soon as they get the $$$ from the govt. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by houstonbofh on 02/18/13 at 18:38:49 2B2A3136392C30580 wrote:
Seriously? I can get charcoal and bat crap in large quantities within a mile of my house. Sulphur is a a few hours away. 2B2A3136392C30580 wrote:
Led casting is much easier than iron casting. Millions of people cast their own bullets now. No issues. The fact that it is soft helps... 2B2A3136392C30580 wrote:
All states that passed CHL laws had a large and measurable drop in violent crime. Not sure how you can keep missing this. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by srinath on 02/19/13 at 06:13:27 I am not missing anything ... we are only seeing 1/2 the data. There should be no blocks on the data and we need historic data ... There may be less crime in whatever area whenever ... but I still want access to all the data ... You may want to and make all the bullets you want ... the fool in the school sprayed 300 ... try making that many ... try spraying that many homemade ... Maybe we will have no effect of a $100 bullet ... but we need to have data to suggest a theory. NRA has blocked all of it, or atleast most of it. Data suggesting a theory isn't happening, so we are using a sledge hammer when we could use a scalpel, if we knew what to cut out. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/19/13 at 06:35:07 & just how is the NRA has blocked data? Where are you? & WHY would NRA block data? All the FBI stats Ive ever seen would be Exactly what the NRA wants people to KNOW! |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by srinath on 02/19/13 at 06:52:46 637C7A7D60675666566E7C703B090 wrote:
The Stats you see are what the NRA wants you to know ... and the ones you dont see are the ones that the NRA dont want you to know. I've posted a bunch of links as to what the NRA has blocked in that other post - you want me to post it again ? They are also feeding lies to their user base. Posted that too. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by justin_o_guy2 on 02/21/13 at 07:05:25 Yes, I missed that. PLease show me what info you have that would indicate the NRA is blocking access to gun data. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by Paraquat on 02/21/13 at 09:12:58 He can't. It's blocked. --Steve |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by srinath on 02/21/13 at 19:37:33 I had posted this in that other post - http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1360345854 And this was what I had posted. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/20/the-blockade-on-science-on-gu... http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-13/gun-lobby-helps-block-data-collectio... http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/29/4668327/gun-lobby-blocks-violence-studies.html http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/01/executive-order-nra-should-fe... http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/31/nra-guns-tobacco-researc... http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/26/opinion/etzioni-guns http://bangordailynews.com/2012/12/31/health/nra-backed-obamacare-provision-r... http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/08/10/160412/commentary-nra-prevents-funding.... https://www.change.org/petitions/stop-the-nra-s-block-on-gun-research http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/02/07/nras-bill-to-ban-anti-gun-lobbying-woul... And Not just blocking information - its also active propogation of lies - like this, which I have read even here - I will look for it in a min - National Rifle Association (NRA) Continues to Feed Its Readers Demonstrable Lies and Distortions Thoroughly debunked years ago, the gun lobby’s favorite research – a 1995 study by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz that reported an astounding 2.5 million defense gun uses (DGU) each year in the United States. Yep, you read it right; 2.5 million DGUs PER YEAR! The Kleck study claims that 2.5 million times per year, someone uses a gun to defend themselves. That’s more defensive gun uses than happened in WWII in Europe in 1944. The Kleck study is so flawed the only thing it measures is the wild imagination of gun owners. I will look, but I have seen that 2.5 million number in a post here. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by houstonbofh on 02/21/13 at 20:12:15 3332292E213428400 wrote:
If all of these people so support the research, why not pay for it? Other than the fact that counter research has shown time and time again that it is false. Research paid for by private groups, I might add. http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/02/07/nras-bill-to-ban-anti-gun-lobbying-woul... Broken link again... 3332292E213428400 wrote:
I call BS. Citation needed, and better than the debunked ones above. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by srinath on 02/21/13 at 20:27:54 You're going to have to google those key words, I cant paste the complete link cos google doesn't show them. And I dont see why public $$ that has been used to collect the gun incident stats should be blocked when a FOIA is placed for its compilation. The data is there, its public, the way to access it is via FOIA, once that was done it should be provided ... the NRA defunded that action. You get a FOIA for say traffic accidents involving cell phones ... you get a data collection run and sent to you. You do that for hospital visits with a busted tooth ... again same thing ... someone will get you a report with raw data. Try that for gun related ... No data for you, defunded data collection. Oh yea you may think its flawed ... many of us dont, many of us will let the data tell us if it is flawed or not. And what you mean BS and citation needed ... NRA has been using that article ... you want me to find that article ? Its an often used NRA stat, look it up, should be easy enough. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Running Wild Post by bill67 on 02/22/13 at 08:51:50 Can Blacks join the NRA,I don't thing they can join the KKKs,So probability not. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |